The hidden exodus: Catholics becoming Protestants

NCR ^ | Apr. 18, 2011 | Thomas Reese

[roamer_1]

[roamer_1:] If one proposes that one's church trumps the very words of YHWH, all that can be left is incredulity.... One cannot step back from that and find common ground, because if you truly believe that, then there is no common ground.

Do you not believe Jesus Christ is God incarnate?

Yes I do... But I find that proof in the Old Testament. Can you?

[roamer_1:] Do you REALLY want to claim that any edifice of man has authority over that?

The Church is not "of man." I should think you would know that....

The 'Assembly' reaches far back before the Roman church ever was. The proofs offered to identify the Roman church as 'THE Church' are very poor, and proofs against it abound. So even if there is authority over the Word to be found in such an edifice (which I deny entirely), I am more than skeptical of the claim. The Temple priesthood, particularly the Pharisees, thought precisely the same way - And that didn't turn out well at all.

The purpose of the priesthood (in this context) has always been to safeguard the Word, not to add or diminish it. That is not power or authority OVER it, but rather, that authority is found in submission to it.

[Natural Law]

"The Popes/Magesterium have no such authentication from God for their extra biblical tradition."

Are you contending that the Church has been completely without miracles since the death of St. John?

[papertyger]

So do all these gratuitous assertions (which according to the rules of logic may be just as gratuitously denied) of yours mean you don't want to find common ground?

[daniel1212]

I know that is a lot of incoming, but if you read all my response thru, you should have seen that holding to Scripture as the supreme and sufficient authority does not restrict the Word of God to being only written (James White, among others, states that “The Bible is not exhaustive in every detail. John 21:25 speaks to the fact that there are many things that Jesus said and did that are not recorded in John, or, in fact, in any book in the world because the whole books of the world could not contain it.” (http://vintage.aomin.org/cathan.html)

If Jesus said, it, then then it is the word of God, thus claiming that only what it in the Bible can be the word of God is a misunderstanding of the the prima Scriptura or SS position.

However, as i explained, this is not contrary to Scripture being the Divinely established assured Word of God, and thus the supreme authority on Truth, and providing what is needed, both in the clear or the derived sense, for salvation and growth in grace.

In contrast is the position that the church draws its authority directly from God, with whatever sources it invokes for support only having authority because she gave it to them.

[Natural Law]

"Re-wording will not remedy making the thread "about" individual Freepers, e.g. looking for motive."

Normally I would presume that the inclusion of any personal pronoun in a posting is personalizing it. However, I have been the object and subject of many, many posts that have been pretty derogatory. Do you rigorously enforce all such posts or only respond to abuse complaints? Can I depend upon you to police these threads and ensure that they again not become about me?

May the Peace of Christ be with you.

[bkaycee]

Clearly the miracles associated with the Apostles were extreme and undeniable, IE raising the dead, healing those crippled from birth, etc..

God heals today, mostly through prayer, not people.

Are “lying signs and wonders” not in your bible?

[roamer_1]

[roamer_1:] First and foremost the Father explicitly commands us against cannibalism and the drinking of blood... So your interpretation must needfully be incorrect, to say the least.

I suppose that is why you would have been among those to desert Him at the synagogue in Capernaum.

I would hope to be among those who thought, "Why is this wonderful Rabbi suddenly spouting Mithra-ism? Certainly there is some lesson here..." And that I would stick around for the other shoe to drop. You know the part where He said He was speaking of 'spirit'...

It isn't a reach to conclude that His Body (as the Word incarnate) is the written Word (how can they be different?) and His Blood is the covering of the Covenant He was offering. So the bread is to be found in the pages of the Bible, and the wine is to be found in the participation in the Covenant. KEEP and DO.

I certainly would not be among those who thought He was sanctioning cannibalism against the Word of YHWH.

[papertyger]

If Jesus said, it, then then it is the word of God, thus claiming that only what it in the Bible can be the word of God is a misunderstanding of the the prima Scriptura or SS position.

I see.

Thank you for the clarification.

Then we are in agreement on the "gotta be in the Bible" doctrine, if not the validity of Sola Scriptura.

[papertyger]

Clearly the miracles associated with the Apostles were extreme and undeniable...

And yet they were, in fact, denied. Just as today....

[roamer_1]

You aren't really suggesting that we should observe Kosher dietary practices, stone adulterers and those who work on the sabbath, perform animal sacrifices, refuse to eat with Gentiles, and the other 600+ laws of the Halakha are you?

It isn't I who suggested it, but the Master Himself:

Mat 5:17 Think not that I came to destroy the law or the prophets: I came not to destroy, but to fulfil.
Mat 5:18 For verily I say unto you, Till heaven and earth pass away, one jot or one tittle shall in no wise pass away from the law, till all things be accomplished.
Mat 5:19 Whosoever therefore shall break one of these least commandments, and shall teach men so, shall be called least in the kingdom of heaven: but whosoever shall do and teach them, he shall be called great in the kingdom of heaven.
Mat 5:20 For I say unto you, that except your righteousness shall exceed the righteousness of the scribes and Pharisees, ye shall in no wise enter into the kingdom of heaven.

(e-Sword:KJV)

Note that I am not advocating Judaism as your words imply - but the Master preached the Torah, and that is undeniable.

[bkaycee]

Are you contending that the Church has been completely without miracles since the death of St. John?

No, just that the magnitude and frequency had diminished greatly.

Why did Paul tell Timothy to drink a little wine for his ailment?

[papertyger]

It isn't a reach to conclude that His Body (as the Word incarnate) is the written Word (how can they be different?) and His Blood is the covering of the Covenant He was offering.

If that's not a "reach" then reach has no meaning.

Let me get this straight. You're willing to believe Jesus' body is a book, but you're not willing to believe his body is a piece of bread, even though he says exactly that....

[Natural Law]

"Note that I am not advocating Judaism as your words imply..."

How is that different from Judaizing?

[bkaycee]

And yet they were, in fact, denied. Just as today....

Don't see the relevance. There were no miracles authenticating any popes or nebulous tradition.

[roamer_1]

You're willing to believe Jesus' body is a book [...]

LOL! Don't be silly! A physical book has nothing to do with it.

Gotta run, I will catch up w/ y'all this evening.

[stpio]

“For something to be “making it personal” it must be speaking to another Freeper, personally.

“Protestants are heretics” is not making it personal. “You are a heretic” is making it personal. “Catholics worship Mary” is not making it personal. “You worship Mary” is making it personal.”

~ ~ ~

Thank you R.M, I understand finally. Other forums, this is not the case. I’ll make general comments, it’s hard to speak from the heart and remain general but I shall try. I want so much to change the view on the faith of Protestants here.

Now I understand why there are so many 3rd person replies
in this thread, people have to get their negative personal
comment about whoever in some way. All flowery but they
use a knife, it’s sad.

[Natural Law]

"No, just that the magnitude and frequency had diminished greatly."

How would you or anyone ever really know?

Pax et bonem

[metmom]

The first command to not eat of the blood came BEFORE the Law.

Genesis 9:4 But you shall not eat flesh with its life, that is, its blood.

It was taught in the Law and the reason for it is given; it is for atonement, not consumption.

The Council of Jerusalem, the one that Catholics claim Peter presided over, said this, reiterating the command to abstain from eating of blood. It rates right up there with sacrificing to idols and sexual immorality.

Acts 15:28-29 28 For it has seemed good to the Holy Spirit and to us to lay on you no greater burden than these requirements: 29 that you abstain from what has been sacrificed to idols, and from blood, and from what has been strangled, and from sexual immorality. If you keep yourselves from these, you will do well. Farewell.”

Scripture cannot contradict itself. If God so clearly commands something, wrong does not become right.

The interpretation of the teaching that we are to eat the flesh and blood of Jesus to mean His actual, literal flesh and blood violates tons of Scripture and Scriptural principles, many of which have already been demonstrated here on this thread.

The interpretation of the teaching as being that it is Spirit and truth, and that the bread and wine are symbolic representations of Jesus broken body and spilled blood gives NO problem in regard to contradicting the rest of the body of Scripture. On the contrary, it fits very well and makes plenty of sense.

Salvation is not by physical actions that force spiritual realities. Salvation is by grace through faith in Christ and it always has been. It was never by keeping the Law and the system of sacrifices.

[metmom]

Genuine miracles still happen.

However, lying signs and wonders can happen too.

This is an interesting case study......

Mystics of the Church
Sister Magdalena of the Cross -The devil’s saint for 40 years & her escape from an evil pact through extraordinary repentance

http://www.mysticsofthechurch.com/2011/12/sister-magdalena-of-cross-nun-who-made.html

[boatbums]

Every time I read your late night comments, I am blessed! Thank you so much for proving that God's word IS what He says it is. I laugh at those who accuse others of "worshiping" the Bible in a vain attempt to cause them to question the place of the Scriptures in the life of a Christian. Just as our savior Jesus Christ used "it is written" to combat the temptations of the devil, so we can as well by using His example because, as you said, it is the ONLY offensive weapon we are given in our spiritual armor. I love what the psalmist says:

The law of the Lord is perfect, converting the soul: the testimony of the Lord is sure, making wise the simple.

The statutes of the Lord are right, rejoicing the heart: the commandment of the Lord is pure, enlightening the eyes.

The fear of the Lord is clean, enduring for ever: the judgments of the Lord are true and righteous altogether.

More to be desired are they than gold, yea, than much fine gold: sweeter also than honey and the honeycomb.

Moreover by them is thy servant warned: and in keeping of them there is great reward. (Psalm 19:7-11)